In one of my first "real" jobs, I worked on an IBM System 36 and System 38
as assistant operator... I also worked as a user on these systems as well as
others (remember CICS?)  I think that qualifies me as one of the "some of
us" :-)  One of the jobs that I had was linking an IBM PC-XT (5 Mb Full
Height Hard Drive... very very modern machine for the time) to the
mainframes using and IRMA card and software libraries.  We created a
customized screen interface using the IRMA link, the libraries, and custom
code on the PC.

Andy

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Howard White <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Andrew Farnsworth wrote:
> > Yep, remember, this was back in the era when multitasking was a
> > mainframe word and was unheard of on anything smaller than room sized.
> > Even then, multitasking was very limited and most commercial mainframes
> > still required a human (or sub-human) operator to manage the workload.
> > Personal Computers didn't get multitasking until the Macintosh came out
> > and even then it was cooperative multitasking (software based) rather
> > than preemptive multitasking (hardware based) and your infinite loop
> > really would bring the machine to it's knees.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> You know that some of us worked on those mainframes, Andy.  Even then we
> wondered just _what_ that multitasking was really doing.  As far as I
> could tell, the programmers were the only ones doing multitasking as we
> had to have eight or ten things to work on at a time while waiting for
> program compiles to cycle through the queue.
>
> In 1979, our company bought a Honeywell minicomputer that was about the
> size of your average office desk.  It had a laminate top on the top to
> carry that metaphor - it was a _desk_, not a desktop, computer.  A
> killer system it was, too:  128 K of memory (I hesitate to say RAM) and
> a 10 MB disk split between a 5MB fixed platter and a 5MB removeable
> cartridge.  We had two terminals and two printers connected to the
> system.  It had a real operating system that would have supported more
> users sessions if there was I/O to drive.
>
> Not real fast but got the job done.
>
> Howard
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"NLUG" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/nlug-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to